I was just thinking the exact same thing last night. I want energon mines! Those amazing seeker designs! And Soundwaves design and personality. They were actually going to make a TFP movie but it was cancelled
Burton being completely delusional and everything he said being a coincidence would make a wonderful twist. He could be a rich conspiracy nutjob who was put under house arrest along some other transformer vets, whose equivalent to Alzheimer's make 'em tell burton fake or disjointed stories, while transcanning or altering the paintings, being mad that "people didn't tell it right". It would be a nice retcon, justifying that everything out of place would be just the work of the mix between an old conspiracy theorist and very old transformers that remember everything wrong or nothing at all. He could have the right side of the story half of the time, while wrong on the other half, therefore by telling the WWII Bee situation we could have Bee saying he has no idea what Burton is talking about. Then on the third act when they find the staff Cogman as well as the rest of the gang would be totally surprised that the staff thing was actually true, and having some sort of arc for Burton's Character instead of being the Old Simmons replacement.
Personally, I think Occam's razor says it's a prequel to all the movies. That's a much more simple explanation than it being a prequel to the '07 movie, but not a prequel to TLK. Plus, if we're going to do it scientifically, we should take into account all the facts, including the fact that Bumblebee is a product of the same writers' room that conceived TLK (with the intention of it all being a cinematic universe), and the fact that there have been more statements from the cast and crew calling it a prequel then a reboot. I personally don't think we can judge whether or not it's a reboot based on only what we're seeing in the trailers. For one thing, we haven't seen the full movie yet. For another thing, these movies have been known to contradict each other in the past. That would technically mean all of them are reboots. Not to mention other movie/television series' (even Marvel, as I pointed out) have contradictions. In Monsters Inc. Mike says he met Sully in grade school. Yet in Monsters University (a prequel), we see they met in college. Does this mean Monsters University is a reboot? No, it's just an oversight by the creative team. It's also worth pointing out that TFWiki (which only considers the facts) currently has it listed in-continuity to the other films. I don't agree with everything TFWiki does, but they'd really be jumping the gun if they listed it as a reboot without confirmation. Again, I'm not saying people shouldn't hope it's a reboot, or even look for evidence. I just think it should be treated as a prequel until we get confirmation otherwise. Well, that would mean AOE and TLK exist in a different continuity than the first three. If that were the case, it would be a bit weird (and confusing) to revisit the original continuity when they've moved on to a new one. That would be like the next Spider-Man existing in the Toby Maguire universe. (Personally, I think they all exist in the same continuity. Any contradictions are better explained as just errors in the storytelling.) I agree, they certainly could. I just think we should wait for confirmation on that before convincing ourselves. Personally, I have my doubts about the whole cancellation thing. We still have yet to hear a public statement about that, and we know that they might be doing an Optimus spinoff. That sounds like part of a cinematic universe to me. All we really know is that a sequel to TLK has been put on indefinite hold for the time being. For that matter, the next Guardians of the Galaxy is also in the same state.
Why does Optimus look like he's got an earth mode on Cybertron? It doesn't seem alien enough. Is this some sort of backwards G1 reference, or just laziness? Still, they got me baited. I'm gonna have to see this. This flashback better not be five seconds long
It's a Cybertronian form, but they probably wanted to keep him identifiable as Optimus. I would guess it's a reference to how the Transformers looked like their Earth forms on Cybertron in G1 (and a lot of other incarnations).
It’s a cybertronian form. Also the wheels can levitate with rockets inside of them as seen in the FOC and WFC games. Also apparently this is the opening scene which leads to BB landing on earth in the 80s so is not a flashback. And people are saying the scene is over 5 minutes long.
And I'll commandeer the USS Shoup and have them bury the ashes (in an airtight container) at the bottom of the Laurentian Abyss,
Barron's doesn't do fanwank clickbait. They're about buying/selling stocks, economics and that's it. Hasbro Powers Up As Rival Mattel Stumbles Bumblebee "Confirmed" As A Reboot, Per CEO Brian Goldner?
Optimus looks phenomenal, moving faceplate, fully armoured shoulders/upper arms and bold faction symbols, great stuff. To think so many maintained for years that this degree of faithfulness to the original look couldn't work onscreen.
The scenes on Cybertron look weird, they look like they belong to a video game, not a live action movie. Maybe the lighting?
low budget thats why and its probably not eveen finished i guess ill find out next week when i see the movie
Advanced tickets are up for Bumblebee for showings next week on Saturday, December 8th. Bumblebee will open on December 8th for an Early Access Showing
Honestly at this point it's looking less like a soft reboot and more a "blunted corners" reboot. I think what possible ties it could have to TF1 are merely token for the sake of drawing in audiences still familiar/attached to that continuity while ultimately being a new universe. As for the aesthetics, I'm quite happy to have all these different "styles" mixed because there's no reason the robots should all look identical. Soundwave and Shockwave look super G1-ny, while Shatter and Dropkick are closer to old Bayverse, with Optimus and Bumblebee sitting in between. I mean, look at the toys. You can have G1 toys next to movie toys in real life, why is that not possible in the movies where the robots can look like whatever they want? It makes them far more interesting IMO, since Bumblebee looks like a round, cuddly guy befitting his character, while the 'Cons are more greebly and industrial looking since they're more military and less concerned with looking "nice." Then you have guys like the 'Waves who are just chunky and blocky, which makes sense if they're more like bruisers, yet the Seekers are again sort of halfway between G1 and a more gangly, movie-lite design. I don't look at these different designs and see conflicting styles. If anything unified "styles" in live-action (especially Hollywood's favoured overdetailed, over-organic "alien" aesthetics) feel less convincing since they look more like things designed by people to "match" rather than being naturally varied like real life technology and people. We as humans don't have a unified aesthetic, why should they?
Wow! This looks interesting. I am about to finish series by Andy Yeatman and then I can add this to the watch list. Also, my cousins are coming over this weekend. Watching a movie will be a good idea. We always go outside and party but this time I would like to sit at home and watch movies.
